Making Sense of the Pentagon’s Acquisition Process: Challenges and Progress
NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. — The White House is eager to simplify the Pentagon’s notoriously convoluted acquisition system. With a process in place that sees quadcopter drones treated with the same regulatory intensity as fighter jets, it’s clear that revamping this antiquated mechanism is essential. However, the complexities of acquisition are just one hurdle. There are broader barriers that prevent commercial companies from diving into the national security landscape.
Understanding the Authority to Operate Process
One of the most pressing concerns in this convoluted environment is the "Authority to Operate" (ATO) process. This verification mechanism is crucial in ensuring that the software deployed by the Defense Department is secure, addressing the increasingly sophisticated cyber threats of our time. Liz Young McNally, the Defense Innovation Unit’s deputy director for commercial operations, illuminated this issue during her address at the Apex Defense Forum. She underscored that the lengthy process of obtaining an ATO is a significant barrier due to the time and costs involved.
“It’s one of those areas where the intent behind it is good…we’ve made some progress, but there’s a lot more that really needs to happen,” McNally explained, revealing that the current pathway is far from optimal for fostering quick technological advances.
Cultural and Training Barriers
The Trump administration made acquisition reform a priority, seeking to facilitate smoother transaction processes for companies looking to work with the Pentagon. Steps like the software memo initiated by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth advocate for the use of rapid buying tools, but these reforms highlight deeper cultural issues that hinder technology acquisition.
Melissa Johnson, leading the acquisition executive for U.S. Special Operations Command, shared insights on the importance of adaptability. “Most people choose not to tailor,” she indicated, attributing this reluctance to a significant training gap. She emphasized the necessity for acquisitions personnel to be well-versed in the range of tools available to them. “If you’re only using one tool that you learned 20 years ago, you’re missing out on opportunities to be more flexible, go faster, and solve problems that you couldn’t solve before.”
Reciprocity and Trust Issues in ATOs
Young McNally conveyed optimism regarding the trajectory of defense acquisition reform but acknowledged that the ATO process and related challenges remain pervasive. Gaining an ATO from the Defense Department grants some level of reciprocity with other defense entities. However, mistrust can complicate this system. McNally pointed out a common mentality among system owners: “I know that you gave the ATO to them, but I don’t fully trust your ATO because if something happens, I’m the one who’s ultimately going to be blamed for it.”
This lack of trust often compels system owners to require further ATOs for companies, even those that already possess valid authorizations elsewhere. The enduring fear of accountability leads to delayed timelines as companies frequently find themselves entangled in extended ATO processes, prolonging their entry into the defense marketplace.
Exploring Rapid ATOs and Flexible Budgeting
In response to the challenges posed by the traditional ATO process, the Defense Innovation Unit has begun experimenting with rapid ATOs among its portfolio companies—a promising avenue that could potentially scale to broader applications within the Department of Defense (DoD). McNally also introduced the budgetary aspect, emphasizing the importance of flexibility in funding and the commitment to commercial technologies.
“We’re working on this in collaboration with other innovation organizations within the DoD, Congress, and so forth,” she noted, acknowledging ongoing efforts to dismantle obstacles that hinder effective technology transfer to warfighters. “This is the next wave of barriers we have to solve to ensure that technology reaches the hands of those who need it promptly.”
The conversation around Pentagon acquisition reform reveals a complex interplay of regulatory, cultural, and financial elements that must be navigated for meaningful progress to occur. The focus remains not only on simplifying processes but also on fostering a culture of trust and adaptability that encourages innovation. As these initiatives unfold, the implications for national security and technological advancement are profound, with the potential for transformation resting on the ability to streamline engagement between defense and commercial sectors.
